Ruthlessness v. Schadenfreude

Adams argues that ruthlessness is more vicious than Schadenfreude (or taking pleasure in the suffering of others) on page 44. He argues that the ruthless person is worse because he is willing to causally contribute to the bad for others, whereas one who has Schadenfreude merely takes sensual pleasure. Yet, this seems like an oversimplification that does not cover all the implications of either potential vice. Adams seems to be generally considering ruthlessness in the form of doing something that helps oneself with a lack of regard for others. However, even if he is only considering this form of ruthlessness, this ruthlessness seems likely to be less vicious than Schadenfreude. Most people act in a way that gives them pleasure or some other good, which seems in some ways at least to be virtuous. These people are at least attempting to cause a net gain in the world. Schadenfreude, on the other hand, is a pleasure in bad taking place in the world, and Hurka would surely condemn this as pure evil. Though I’m not necessarily a follower of Hurka, it does seem like having a good end and poor means is less vicious than having no means but enjoying a bad end.